GeForce GT 9400 vs 320M Mac |
VS
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Higher clock speed | 550 MHz | vs | 450 MHz | More than 20% higher clock speed | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||
| Lower TDP | 23W | vs | 50W | 2.2x lower TDP | |||
Report a correction
Features Key features of the GeForce GT 9400 vs 320M Mac
pixel rate Number of pixels a graphics card can render to the screen every second
texture rate Speed at which a graphics card can perform texture mapping
floating point performance How fast the gpu can crunch numbers
shading units Subcomponents of the gpu, these run in parallel to enable fast pixel shading
texture mapping units Built into each gpu, these resize and rotate bitmaps for texturing scenes
render output processors GPU commponents responsible for transform pixels as they flow between memory buffers
Specifications Full list of technical specs
gpu | GeForce GT 9400 | vs | 320M Mac |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPU brand | Nvidia | Nvidia | |
| GPU name | G96 C1 | MCP89 | |
| Clock speed | 550 MHz | 450 MHz | |
| Is dual GPU | No | No | |
| Reference card | None | None | |
noise and power | |||
| TDP | 50W | 23W | |
raw performance | GeForce GT 9400 | vs | 320M Mac |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shading units | 16 | 48 | |
| Texture mapping units | 8 | 16 | |
| Render output processors | 4 | 8 | |
| Pixel rate | 2.2 GPixel/s | 3.6 GPixel/s | |
| Texture rate | 4.4 GTexel/s | 7.2 GTexel/s | |
| Floating-point performance | 44.8 GFLOPS | 91.2 GFLOPS |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $54 | ||
| GeForce 210 vs GT 9400 | ||
 | VS | |
| Radeon HD 5450 vs GeForce GT 9400 | ||
 | VS | |
| $55 | ||
| GeForce GT 610 vs 9400 | ||
 | VS | |
| $98 | ||
| GeForce GT 730 vs 9400 | ||
 | VS | |
| $107 | ||
| GeForce GT 630 vs 9400 | ||
 | VS | |
| GeForce GT 9500 vs 9400 | ||
 | VS | |
| Radeon R5 220 vs GeForce GT 9400 | ||
